A quote out of what Wayne sent me via PM:
"Several years ago ARCO produced a product called ARCO Graphite oil. This product cost ARCO several millions of dollars in law suits because of the problem of agglomeration which lead to plugging filters and fine oil passage ways. Moly is likely to have the same problem. The plugging problem is very real and that is most likely why Cummins doesn't like moly, if infact they DO NOT APPROVE! I do not know this!"
Gary,
I think I answered this in the above paragraph.
Wayne, please provide a pointer or quote from a reliable Cummins source where they have
recently indicated they "don't like" Moly! It's clearly obvious as stated right on the Delo 400 (WITH Moly!) bottles that the Delo
is "recommended" in lube specifications by Caterpillar, Cummins, John Deere, Volvo, and numerous other heavy diesel engine makers!
AND, if you reply to no OTHER question or statement I make here, DO please respond to THIS one:
Do Amsoils diesel lube bottles also make the same clear statement and recommendation relative to the specific engine manufacturers named above? 
Yes as a matter of fact. Taken from the current bottle:
API CI-4+/CF/CF-2/SL. GLOBAL DHD-1. ACEA A3/B3,E3, E5 JASO DH-1. MACK. DETROIT DIESEL. CATARPILLAR. CUMMINS. VOLVO. DAIMLER-BENZ.
And would Cummins be listed there, IF they "didn't like", or objected to use of Moly in oils used in their engines? After all, use of Moly in engine lubes is HARDLY new or untried - other major brands have been successfuly using it LONG before Chevron started - Delo was great before - now it is LOTS better! 
NEVER said Delo was bad... ... ... ... ... ever!
Fact is, Delo 400 oils are used widely in 18-wheeler applications, and one of the MOST RELIABLE sources for Delo is at TRUCK STOPS!
Engines like Caterpillar and cummins are pretty common in the 18-wheeler trucks - do ya think maybe THEY are using the wrong stuff too? :-laf
No, everyone has a joice, just like you and I with our trucks of choice. We think the CTD is the best, yet ALL of the pickupo truck Diesels are will haul and pull very well... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..... Some BETTER than others!
How many 18-wheelers do ya suppose are using Amsoil in their engines - you'd sorta think longer wear and better economy would rate pretty high in their lubricant decision making, what with extended drains and all. 
I know of several Companies that are using the Amsol lubes. The largest I know, has over 200 trucks.
As to the Arco use of graphite, there was another FAR more common problem with use of graphite in engine oils NOT related to plugging filters or settling out of the oil - and that was that as engines wore, the process of oil migration into the combustion chambers would quickly allow the graphite - an electrical conductor - to coat the sparkplug electrodes, and cause misfiring and stalled engines!
This is most likely a very true statement, as the grahpite could certainly coat electrodes.
Simply because Arco made a mistake with graphite, certainly does NOT automatically call for the quantum leap that Chevron is making one with Moly - a fair number of OTHER top brands are quite successfully using it as well!
I'll say it again, Amsoil is GOOD stuff - but quite frankly, I see their apparent criticism and attempted demonization of the use of Moly by competitors as an act of self-defense against what they very well KNOW is an improvement in the anti-wear characteristics of their competition!
Further, As I pile the miles up on MY truck, using the Moly-containing Delo 400, we will clearly SEE exactly how badly the evil Moly compromizes and damages my engine. So far, only using the new Moly-containing Delo as makeup oil on TP filter changes for the last 8,000 miles or so, my Iron content has DROPPED from 20 ppm the previous analysis, to *3 ppm* on this last one. Aluminum dropped from 2 ppm to 1, and Copper dropped from 4 ppm to 1!
And how much "makeup" oil was added after the filter changes? THis would certainly drop the readings. As I have mentioned to you before, Wear Metals identified by Spectrochemical analysis are expressed in Parts Per MIllion (PPM) of the environment they inhabit. The sizes of "wear mwtal" particles that can be identified by Spectrochemicla analysis are between
3 and 10 MICRONS and under normal conditions, the generation of wear metals is gradual and increases slowly as the engine is used.
I can not emphisize enough, NO TWO pieces of equipment wear at the same rate, even IDENTICAL pieces of equipment will exhibit variation in their rate of internal wear.
Yeah, PART of that is my "TP" bypass filter - but is it REMOTELY possible the better oil used as makeup oils on TP element changes MIGHT have been a factor as well? After all that SAME TP filter HAS been on there the whole time...
Other readings were the same right down the line - and I hardly need some distant analysis tech to tell me my CURRENT analysis WITH Moly, is BETTER than the previous one WITHOUT Moly - and this last analysis by Cat was with
20,000 miles on that Delo as part of my extended drain "test"!
Wayne, I greatly respect your knowledge, as well as your chosen product - all the above is offered in good spirit, and in the name of honest debate - I hope you see it that way!
I have repeatedly admitted that Amsoil is good stuff - probably as good a synthetic as you can buy - would it be too much of a stretch for Amsoil and it's distributors to grudgingly admit that oils like Delo are pretty good too?
Attention: TDR Forum Junkies 
